There are many papers or theses researched the similar topic which always focused on individual project management skills or risk management technique. Have you ever thought if a IT service provider try to process multiple projects, how the top manager team should monitor and supervise? How can they get this project done effectively and efficiently? How can they make the business more adaptive, responsive, and thus more profitable in a rapidly changing, multiproject environment? The advantages which can easily present why enterprise project management function its capability and show up its importance. This thesis proposed the point of view from the project management office, and try to draft a series of flexible processes to speed up and eliminate internal works of an enterprise, to raise customer satisfaction, to maintain the proper risk level; even though the controlling process had simplified, the risks still can be managed. In this research, which focused on risk assessing process in enterprise project management, reference lots of issues, books, magazines¡Ketc., by literature review and existing assessing flow in I company, find out the risks of multiprojects, go through generalized and analysis methodology to conduct a lot of different processes which should be properly used in each type of projects. Following results could be come out from this research, 1st, to realize what are the risk factors of enterprise project management(EPM). 2nd, to provide a referenced check list and process to which business wants to implement EPM. 3rd, to offer flexible risk assessing models speeding up processes and raise customer satisfaction. We could find 80% Type A projects could shorten process working days from original 31 days to 9~11 days; and 86% Type B projects, from 31days to 4~6days; total 81.37% sampling projects will get benefits.

Thesis (MAppSc Project Management)--University of South Australia, 1993

iv ABSTRACT This research study was the first to investigate the nature of time-use behaviour of the South African Clinical Research Associates (CRA’s) and Clinical Trial Managers (CTM’s). The study determined the relative polychronicity of project members in clinical trials in South Africa and identified possible non-alignment in the approaches and expectations between managers of clinical research projects and that of their project staff members. The study assumed that the clinical trial project environment is monochronic by nature. Information about a possible mismatch in expected temporal orientation of project staff and real temporal orientation of project staff would constitute grounds for adaptation of project management execution guidelines and staff selection processes for CRA’s and Managers of clinical trials. Quantitative data were collected through the Inventory of Polychronic Values measuring instrument from a sample of the total registered membership base of the South African Clinical Research Association by means of a web based questionnaire. The study analysed the relationships between the following three constructs of relevance: 1. CRA’s own personal preferences for time-use, and 2. CRA’s perceptions of what time-use behaviour their direct managers expect from them, and 3. Managers’ expectations for the time-use behaviour of CRA’s. CRA’s were found to be relatively monochronic in their work behaviour towards time-use and Managers to be more polychronic than CRA’s. Within each group a range of timeuse opinions and preferences were found. Within the constraints of sample size, Cultural Heritage and Age were the only demographic variables found to exert significant influence on the dependent variables in this study. A good alignment was found between the CRA’s perceptions of the time-use behaviours expected from them and the Managers’ expectations for time-use behaviour. The results of this study relate to complementary role differentiation between monochronic and polychronic people in project execution and management.

published_or_final_version / Surveying / Master / Master of Science

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.